Throughout its history, the United States has opposed a standing professional military. Instead, our nation has structured its armed forces so that our national security heavily relies upon reservists, particularly after Vietnam. Since 9/11 alone, nearly 200,000 reservists have been mobilized, with thousands more expected to be so. And many of those reservists who completed their initial mobilization were later remobilized for a second time. In a dramatic departure from the past, the Defense Department has begun deploying Guardsman to such places as the Balkans, the Sinai, Iraq, and almost everywhere else the regular forces go.

Consider the following situation: An employee anticipates that his employment is about to be terminated, for what he believes to be discriminatory or otherwise unlawful reasons. After consulting with an attorney, he decides to tape-record conversations with his supervisors, in the hopes of recording a "smoking gun" comment. A short time later, the employee is terminated, and he later commences litigation in federal court against his employer.

Recent rulings of importance to you and your practice.

On November 18, 2003, the Supreme Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, in a divided 4-3 decision, ruled that a city or town clerk may not deny a marriage license to a couple on the grounds that they are not man and woman. The basis for the decision of the court is that the Commonwealth may not deny "the protections, benefits, and obligations conferred by civil marriage of two individuals of the same sex who wish to marry" and still comply with the constitutionally safeguarded rights of due process and equal protection. The decision has far-reaching ripple effects that impact upon same-sex couples throughout the country and the attorneys who represent them, and is not limited to the geographical boundaries of the state of Massachusetts.

At its Annual Meeting in August 2003, the House of Delegates of the American Bar Association adopted Standards of Practice for Lawyers Representing Children in Custody Cases (Standards). These standards are the result of a 10-year project undertaken by the ABA Section of Family Law, involving lawyers, judges and legal scholars. Adoption of the Standards establishes clear ABA policy for lawyers representing children in custody cases. In 1996, the ABA adopted similar Standards of Practice for representing a child in Abuse and Neglect Cases.

All family lawyers know that a custody trial is about what is best for the children. Parents may think they understand this, but often do not "own" the concept because they are so obsessed with their own problems. The hurt and anger over what has happened clouds their thinking. Facing the possibility of part-time parenting or substantially reduced parenting time, they have difficulty focusing on what is best for the children. This is not to imply that the parents do not care about their children's needs, but getting them to express their concerns for their children instead of using court time to vent, tattle, bicker and complain, is often a formidable task.

Features

In an era when identity theft causes millions of dollars in losses, many clients are properly expressing fears about disclosing their credit card numbers, checking account information, Social Security Numbers and other sensitive financial data during required financial disclosure proceedings. While some clients balk about disclosing personal financial data, other clients actually refuse to cooperate with even standard divorce disclosure proceedings.

The chart below summarizes hourly rates used by federal courts throughout New York State in recent attorneys' fees awards made in various types of employment cases. In addition to the name of the case, citation, judge making the award and federal district, the chart shows the name of the firm or other entity receiving the award and the hourly rates awarded to the lead counsel (LC), a partner or principal in the firm (P), associates (A), and paralegals (PL). Hourly rates for travel time are excluded, but ordinarily are awarded at a rate equal to one half the attorneys' awarded hourly rate.